Michael Abrahams | Should we discriminate against the unvaccinated?

Recently, during a speech at the handover of COVID-19 home test kits to tourism workers, Minister of Health and Wellness Dr Christopher Tufton announced that there will be an events calendar for a series of happenings over the next three to four months “that will allow more persons to congregate around certain events within a controlled setting,” adding that “the single most significant criteria of that, is that you must be vaccinated”.

Dr Tufton, who previously commented that “the time has come for us to frown on the unvaccinated,” continued with the same narrative, and went on to share his view that we should “distinguish,” “differentiate” and “discriminate” in favour of those who are vaccinated.

According to Dr Tufton, “the truth is, if you take the time to protect yourself and others don’t, then I believe you should enjoy more privileges and rights to certain activities over those who have decided not to”.

I cringed when I saw the video of the minister making those remarks. There is an old Italian proverb, which, translated into English, says, “Honey catches more flies than vinegar.” In other words, you are more likely to reach and influence people by being polite and respectful, than by being hostile and abrasive.

UNHELPFUL

His constant berating of unvaccinated persons is unhelpful, as is his approach to them as a homogeneous group. It would be more effective if the minister and his team worked on ways to incentivise and encourage people to get vaccinated, rather than to scold them. In fact, while announcing the upcoming events, the health and wellness minister was afforded an excellent opportunity to motivate people to get vaccinated, but chose the route of spewing ‘vinegar’.

Lockdowns, and restrictions regarding gatherings, have taken a toll on our mental and social well-being. The announcement of events that will allow people to congregate is a welcome one, but if COVID-19 outbreaks occur at these events, it is the unvaccinated who will fare worse, as the data show that the risk of them becoming severely ill, being hospitalised and dying is greater than with persons who are vaccinated. So rather than being discriminatory and “frowning on” unvaccinated persons, they should be made to understand that as we try to return to normality, it would be in their best interest to get vaccinated, especially if they have never contracted COVID-19 and have certain comorbidities. In other words, to use encouragement rather than denigration.

The statement, “if you take the time to protect yourself and others don’t”, is also problematic, as it makes an erroneous assumption. By saying this, the minister is implying that people who are unvaccinated did not ‘take the time to protect themselves’, and this is misleading. The unvaccinated do not all have the same mindset. This group ranges from defiant anti-vaxxers who reject all vaccines, and are obsessed with spreading misinformation, to people who are well-informed and have genuine concerns and are not convinced that the benefits of these vaccines outweigh the risks for them.

There are many unvaccinated who do ‘take time to protect themselves’. They avoid gatherings, wear masks, exercise regularly, eat healthily, ensure that they are not vitamin D-deficient, wash and sanitise their hands appropriately, and practise good respiratory hygiene. To add vaccination to those measures would be a plus, but to say that they have not taken the time to protect themselves is incorrect.

ANOTHER CONCERN

Beyond the draconian tone and the negative stereotyping of the unvaccinated exists another concern: Is there is a rational reason for this proposed separation in our country at this time? By permitting only vaccinated people into the venues on the ‘events calendar’, an attempt is being made to allow only persons with documented evidence of a likely immune response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, to congregate. This, however, does not guarantee that the virus will not spread. During our fourth wave, driven by the notoriously highly transmissible Omicron variant, breakthrough infections (infections in previously vaccinated persons) were not uncommon. So, gatherings of only vaccinated people will not necessarily prevent the spread of the virus.

As we speak, vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals are allowed to comingle on buses, at workplaces, and in banks, markets, supermarkets and churches, so why allow this and, as a surge is diminishing, announce plans to separate these two groups at specific events? What is the rationale for this? Why relax restrictions at churches and simultaneously announce imposing some at certain events? Vaccinated and unvaccinated people from across the island congregate weekly at our largest market, Coronation Market, without restrictions, every week, and no outbreaks have been reported by our Ministry of Health and Wellness at that site. So, is the decision to ‘discriminate’ a public health one, supported by reliable data, or is there another agenda?

Dr Tufton’s statement was punitive and divisive in its tone, and the plan to exclude the majority of our population from certain events raises many pertinent questions deserving of honest answers. Stating your intention to discriminate against citizens you serve, and deny them certain rights, will have the opposite effect of what it is intended to do. It will incite acrimony, resentment and resistance, rather than compliance.

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on Twitter @mikeyabrahams.